Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Please list your source for this because I remember people who used to cross the state line to buy alcohol.. This doesnt mean that someone who was 19 from state A where the drinking age was 18, could go to a state where the drinking age was 21 would be allowed to buy alcohol.
No but a person who is 16 can go to a neighboring state where the legal marriage age in 16, get married and will be legally married in his home state.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
From what I recall, each state could govern their own laws and are under no obligation to recognize other states laws if they are in direct violation of their own states.
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
Article IV US Constitution
The court has used this clause to force other states to recognize adoptions by same sex parents. Short step to forcing recognition of same sex marriages.
I can't believe the level of bigotry in this comment.. are you kidding me? my partner and I are both avid body builders, and active in the community... our friends encompass gay and straight people.. I played sports in high school and college... and I don't watch any of those shows.. and our last vacation was to yellowstone park for a family reunion... your words are very upsetting and disrespectful... you should be ashamed
Wow AVID bodybuilders, I did not need that visual! Look, I am sure you are quite manly, if you would get over yourself for one moment and stop being so hypersensitive and look at the context of my RESPONSE, the point was what little boy 8,9,10,11-18 year old is going to want to turn out for football or any thing else where he is put in the position (by two selfish, self centered homosexuals), of constantly having to explain who his dad is and who the other guy is and where is your mom and you mean you never had a mom and so do they sleep together, etc.. etc....... Get Real and lighten up, or spend your life going around labeling everyone else a bigot and hatefull, its your choice!
The judges in question are Republican appointees, hardly "liberal". The people were not robbed of their voice as she claimed- they voted for something unconstitutional and it didn't stand up to the challenge. There was no judicial activism here. The lady posted a very emotional statement but hardly factual.
Lets see
"The people voted to ban gay marriage in California, the liberal judges took your rights away and overturned your right to have a voice."
first, the people did vote for a ban on gay marriage in California.
second, wouldnt it be fair to call judges that take the peoples vote away, supporting a liberal act, liberal? They surely didnt make a conservative decision.. Even one of the judges that voted no, said that they supported gay marriages, but the law just didnt allow them to vote to override the will of the people who voted against it..
Wow AVID bodybuilders, I did not need that visual! Look, I am sure you are quite manly, if you would get over yourself for one moment and stop being so hypersensitive and look at the context of my RESPONSE, the point was what little boy 8,9,10,11-18 year old is going to want to turn out for football or any thing else where he is put in the position (by two selfish, self centered homosexuals), of constantly having to explain who his dad is and who the other guy is and where is your mom and you mean you never had a mom and so do they sleep together, etc.. etc....... Get Real and lighten up, or spend your life going around labeling everyone else a bigot and hatefull, its your choice!
Interesting attempt at shifting blame. What you are saying there, correct me if I misunderstood, is that when a homosexual couple has kids it is their fault that the kid gets harassed by the heteros who are intolerant of homosexuals and their kids. Is personal responsibility on pause among heterosexuals when the subject of homosexuality comes up or is that only in your world?
Good God! It's not ABOUT the bedroom! It's about the COURT ROOM! It's about the HOSPITAL ROOM! It's about the LIVING ROOM!
Gay sex is legal and happening all over the world as you read this. The sex isn't an issue. It isn't what people are fighting for. It's not new. Homosexuality is as old a the hills.
This is about something much richer than that. It's about two people being able to commit to one another. If you want to consider being gay a tawdry subject of shame, then you should go criticize the creepy husbands and pastors and politicians sneaking off to have shameful anonymous sex in public bathrooms because they are too ashamed to confront the reality of their desires and deal with their homosexuality like an adult instead of lying to the world and pretending they're just one of the guys.
The people who want to get married deal with your scorn every day. They've dealt with the angry stares and the alienated parents and the jokes and the scowls. They've endeavored to be out and attempt a meaningful and public relationship with someone they love. To focus your hatred on these people is wrong-headed.
No but a person who is 16 can go to a neighboring state where the legal marriage age in 16, get married and will be legally married in his home state.
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
Article IV US Constitution
The court has used this clause to force other states to recognize adoptions by same sex parents. Short step to forcing recognition of same sex marriages.
The law states that Congress has to prescribe the manner, which Congress has not done so for "gay marriages".
In addition, a state is only required to recognize the marriage that took place in another state, if that marriage would have been legal in their own state.
Not only is a state not required to recognize a marriage, but taking a child across the state line for the intent to marry could be illegal, especially if you consomated the marriage and that consumation was illegal in the original state.
Interesting attempt at shifting blame. What you are saying there, correct me if I misunderstood, is that when a homosexual couple has kids it is their fault that the kid gets harassed by the heteros who are intolerant of homosexuals and their kids. Is personal responsibility on pause among heterosexuals when the subject of homosexuality comes up or is that only in your world?
No I live in the real world, I coach boys and I have boys, maybe not in frisco but around here boys are going to wonder those things!
Lets see
"The people voted to ban gay marriage in California, the liberal judges took your rights away and overturned your right to have a voice."
first, the people did vote for a ban on gay marriage in California.
Agreed.
Quote:
second, wouldnt it be fair to call judges that take the peoples vote away, supporting a liberal act, liberal?
Only if the judges are actually liberal. As along as the California Constitution disallows voting to curb the rights of a protected status (or some such terminology) minority (and in California apparently sexual orientation is such a status), the people had no business being put in a position to vote on this issue in the first place. State activists tried to pass something that was unconstitutional and while the people supported it, the Justices had to strike it down because it is clearly unconstitutional. This would have been done by any judge worth their salt. There is no liberalism or conservatism here.
Quote:
They surely didnt make a conservative decision..
You mean following the State Constitution is not the conservative way of doing things or are you talking about judgments based on party lines? The CA Constitution is apparently clear on sexual orientation and Equal Protection.
Quote:
Even one of the judges that voted no, said that they supported gay marriages, but the law just didnt allow them to vote to override the will of the people who voted against it..
From the reasoning of the majority of judges it appears that the will of the people, while a significant thing to consider, was exercised to an unconstitutional result.
No I live in the real world, I coach boys and I have boys, maybe not in frisco but around here boys are going to wonder those things!
Seems to me the correct thing to do would be to take these kids aside & explain that not every family is the same & even if somethings different than what they're used to, it doesn't mean that it's bad. How's that, huh? Not spreading the hatred to kids, wow what a concept!
What happened to turning the other cheek? What would Jesus do, oh self-righteous one?
Trust me on a thread like this I have both cheeks turned! Since you asked I believe Jesus would say , "Stop your sin and follow me!"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
